Forum:Block Unregistered Users From Editing the Wiki
Voting has ended. For the Month of August 2010, Unregistered Users will not be able to edit the wiki. Our writing quality has degraded horribly to the point of shame. It has caused me great alarm to see such a hopeful wiki wilt. More and more vandalism have been taking place, and there's no end in sight. I for one am sick of seeing this, these, and I am especially sick of learning1 about2 Viper's3 ridiculously4 large5 breasts6 (explicit) ( get7 my8 point9 ?10). I propose we ask Wikia to disable unregistered editing for a test period of One Month. During this month all unregistered users who have committed lesser infractions will temporarily be unbanned and put on notice 'for a period of 30 days. If they intentionally violate the Code of Conduct during this time, they will receive a irrevocable Permanent Ban. This give them a 'second chance' to make an account. Note: Unregistered users like exhibit ( 6 ) will stay banned for a year. If this motion passes, For the Month of August, Unregistered User Editing will be disabled. The Pro's *Less Vandalism *More User Accounts *People can be held responsible *Bans will be shorter *Higher work quality (see no. 3) *More legitimate information for us, since the majority of information contributed by Unregistered Users is complete nonsense(opinion!) The Con's *We lose about a fifth of our information sources. (unreliable or not) *Vandalism accounts may spring up (unlikely, but possible) *Vandals may try to get "revenge" :'Comment- couldn't we hold the person responsible though? Because he has an account; we can track their changes. -- 18:44, July 18, 2010 (UTC) ::Comment - I'm treating this like Wikipedia right now, which I shouldn't have... Voting Rules You are allowed to vote "Support", "Oppose", "Comment", or "Question". This Motion will requires a minimum of 15 total votes, consisting of at least a 70% support vote majority or more to pass. Bureaucratic discretion range is 67-74%. Sign below to cast a vote. Votes Yays ' ' #'Support' Hunter (The nominator.) #'Support' LiveFree (did not sign himself, but voted) #'Support' Kamakazee (did not sign himself, but voted) #'Support' Tmcan8 (did not sign himself, but voted) #'Support' User:V3ctor' #'Support M-07 -- 08:00, July 18, 2010 (UTC) #'Support' 10:59, July 18, 2010 (UTC) #'Support' User:Extreme133 #'Support' Firefriend32 15:52, July 18, 2010 (UTC) #'Support' Coraircate #'Support' ForteFZ #'Support' DeathPossum #'Support' [[User:Soresumakashi|'SoresuMakashi']](Everything I tell you is a liethe truth) 22:17, July 18, 2010 (UTC) #'Support' User:Danielcook1 #'Support' User:WingZeroKai--WingZeroKai 03:06, July 19, 2010 (UTC) ' '''NOTICE: The minimum requirement of 15 votes has been reached.' #'Support' User:Negabandit86 Negabandit86 Talk WOOT!!!!! 20:50, July 19, 2010 (UTC) #'Support' Anton095 Read below in comments. #'Support' Arcaidia #'Support' -STALKER- #'Support' Xrangermwen6 #'Support' --G3ars of Ha1o 05:18, July 22, 2010 (UTC) #'Support' --Drkdragonz66 15:39, July 22, 2010 (UTC) #SUPPORT----Vinh834 :) #'Support' ARevolvingDoor 23:57, July 22, 2010 (UTC) #'Support' FootballPwns #'Support' Padkiller Nays #'Oppose' User:Me8250 i kind of think its a waste of 20% of info, there isnt that much vandalism, only on viper really. i think a better solution would be to block heavily abused pages (like viper's) so as to only allow members to edit them, or even heavier abused pages (viper!?!?!?) could be blocked so only admins could edit. #'Oppose' User:tagg3r I'm thinking that 1/5 of our info is really an understatement. For example, look at the the people who are voting: we all have accounts because we're dedicated. But probably 90% of the people who actually use this Wiki for info and adds to it doesn't bother to create an account--why bother when you can edit for free? As for the vandalism issue, it's only those few idiots who even bother to deface a page. Plus, it's not too much trouble to fix vandalism. I agree with Me8250's proposition up to a point. Instead of blocking just that one page from editing permanently, we should restrict editing of pages like Viper for only 30 days, not the every article. #'Oppose ' User:Aznftw We should just block the heavily abused page, like me8250 siad these pages only adminscan edit Comments *ForteFZ - I really hate it when people edit articles stupidly. *Soresumakashi - As long as it's only for the proposed 30 days. Any more will have to be put to a new vote. *User:Negabandit86 - Wonder why they would make stupid edits the first place? Dumb idiots... *User:Anton095 - Can't we create a page for non-registered user to edit and say what needed to be edited? *User:LiveFree - I'm lookin for this to be permanent. *User:Extreme133 - Hopefully this won't induce the Streisand Effect... *User:Negabandit86 - Has anyone begun to notice that there are little bit less unregistered people editing? *User:ZeroExalted - Damn it, Hunter, as soon as you left a group of vandals trashed the Wiki. And you HAD to go to camp during this time. >-> *User:Negabandit86 - Stupid @#$%ing unregistered editors should stay out of this wiki. And they are pretty daring to actually mess with us. *User:Extreme133 - lock it down already they're pulling off a last ditch vandalism spree Question *Why are we waiting 7 days? I mean, if the majority rules, why should we wait for such an official time? o-o **It makes it fair on decision making.- Danielcook1 **It gives everyone a chance to weigh in. -- 03:55, July 19, 2010 (UTC)